The Chicago Council of Lawyers Evaluation Report: Judges ...

The Chicago Council of Lawyers Evaluation Report: Judges Seeking Retention in the November 2018 General Election

and Judicial Candidates Seeking to Fill Judicial Vacancies

September 25, 2018

The Chicago Council of Lawyers, in this report, releases its evaluation of the judges seeking retention in the November 5th general election. We also include in this report our evaluation of the candidates who won their primary election held in March 2018 and who are on the November ballot.

EVALUATION METHODOLOGY FOR RETENTION CANDIDATES

The criteria for the Council's evaluations are whether the retention candidate has demonstrated the ability to serve on the relevant court in the following categories:

?fairness, including sensitivity to diversity and bias ?legal knowledge and skills (competence) ?integrity ?experience ?diligence

?impartiality

?judicial temperament

?respect for the rule of law ?independence from political and institutional influences ?professional conduct

?character

?community service If a candidate has demonstrated the ability to perform the work required of a judge in all of these areas, the Council assigns a rating of "qualified." If a candidate has demonstrated excellence in most of these areas, the Council assigns a rating of "well qualified." If a candidate has demonstrated excellence in all of these areas, the Council assigns a rating of "highly qualified." If a candidate has not demonstrated that he or she meets all of the criteria evaluated by the Council, the Council assigns a rating of "not qualified."

1

As part of the evaluation process, we require candidates to provide us with detailed information about their backgrounds, including any complaints filed against them with the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission ("ARDC") or the Judicial Inquiry Board ("JIB").

In conducting these evaluations, the Council has participated in a joint investigation and interview process with the Alliance of Bar Associations for Judicial Screening ("Alliance"). The Alliance includes the following bar associations: Asian American Bar Association, Black Women Lawyers Association, Chicago Council of Lawyers, Cook County Bar Association, Decalogue Society of Lawyers, Hellenic Bar Association, Hispanic Lawyers' Association of Illinois, Illinois State Bar Association, Lesbian and Gay Bar Association of Chicago, Puerto Rican Bar Association, and the Women's Bar Association of Illinois.

The Council's evaluation process includes: (1) a review of a written informational questionnaire provided to the Alliance by the candidate, including details of the candidate's career and professional development and information on any complaints filed against the candidate with the JIB or the ARDC; (2) a review of the candidate's written responses to the supplemental essay questionnaire; (3) interviews of judges, attorneys, and others with personal knowledge about the candidate, including those who have and those who have not been referred to the Alliance by the candidate, and not restricted to Council members; (4) a review of the candidate's professional written work, where available; (5) an interview of the candidate done jointly with the Alliance; (6) review of any information concerning the candidate provided by the ARDC or the

JIB; (7) a review of any other information available from public records, such as the Board

of Election Commissioners and prosecutorial agencies; and (8) an evaluation of all the above materials by the Council's Judicial Evaluation

Committee;

(9) submission of the proposed evaluation and write-up to the candidate prior to its public release, to provide an opportunity for comment, correction, or reconsideration.

2

(10) the candidate is given a reasonable period of time to submit a written appeal of the Council's rating and written findings. The appeal is a written response to concerns discussed in the proposed write-up. The appeal is reviewed by both members of the original committee and by individuals who work with the Committee exclusively for appeals. Appellate decision-making is done by consensus.

The Council places special importance on interviews with attorneys who practice before the judge, particularly those who were not referred to the Council by the candidate. Most evaluations are based on information gathered and interviews held during the few months just prior to the general election.

In evaluating candidates, the Council expresses written reasons for its conclusions. Without knowing the reason for a recommendation concerning a candidate, the public cannot use the bar's evaluations intelligently to draw its own conclusions.

THE IMPORTANCE OF THE RETENTION ELECTIONS

The retention elections provide the voter with an opportunity to remove those judges whose judicial performance has been, in some respect, unsatisfactory. Retention elections provide the only practical opportunity for the voters as a whole to focus on the performance of judges, with a realistic opportunity to defeat those candidates who deserve to be defeated.

EVALUATION METHODOLOGY FOR JUDICIAL CANDIDATES IN CONTESTED ELECTIONS

Judicial candidates seeking election must run for specific vacancies. Candidates seeking election to the Circuit Court ? which is the County's trial-level court for both civil and criminal matters ? may run in either a countywide or a subcircuit race. Legislation creating the subcircuits provides that approximately one-third of the judges are elected by voters of the entire County, and each of the remaining judges elected by voters runs in one of fifteen geographical districts into which the County has been arbitrarily divided. Once elected, there is no distinction between a "countywide" judge and a "subcircuit" judge. Either kind can be assigned to any judicial post in the County.

The Council rates candidates as "highly qualified," "well qualified," "qualified," or "not qualified." If a candidate refuses to submit his or her credentials to the Council, that candidate is rated "not recommended" unless the Council is aware of credible information that would justify a "not qualified" rating. Because we believe a willingness to participate in bar association and other public evaluations is a key indicator of fitness for public office, no candidate who refuses to be screened can be found "qualified."

We apply higher standards to candidates for the Supreme Court and the Appellate Court. Because these Courts establish legal precedents that bind the lower courts, their work has a broad impact on the justice system. Moreover, qualities of scholarship and writing ability are more important to the work of the Supreme and Appellate Court justices than they are to satisfactory performance as a trial judge.

The Council does not evaluate candidates based on their substantive views of political or social issues. Nor do we take into account the particular race in which a candidate is running or the candidates against whom a candidate is running. We apply a uniform standard for all

3

countywide and subcircuit elections because judges elected through either method can be assigned to any judicial position in the Circuit Court.

It should be noted that a lawyer might be performing well or even very well without being qualified to be a judge. A good lawyer may be unqualified to be a judge, for instance, because of a narrow range of prior experience, limited trial experience, or limited work doing legal research and writing. A lawyer may have the temperament and intelligence to be a judge without yet having worked in a position that would allow the candidate to demonstrate that capacity. Accordingly, it should be recognized and expected that we will rate some good lawyers "not qualified."

Retention Elections (all ballots)

Judge Martin S. Agran was admitted to the Illinois bar in 1972. Prior to becoming a judge, Martin S. Agran served as an Assistant Cook County State's Attorney and was in private practice. He was also a panel attorney with the Federal Defender's Office for 14 years. He was appointed to the Circuit Court in 1994 and elected to the bench the same year. Since 2011, he has been assigned to the Third Municipal District of the Circuit Court of Cook County in Rolling Meadows, Illinois, where he is on civil call. His previous judicial assignments were at the Chancery Division (2004 to 2011); the Law Division (2001 to 2004); Juvenile Court, Juvenile Justice Division (1996-2001); Juvenile Court, Child Protection Division (1994-1996); and the First Municipal Division (1994).

Judge Agran is well respected and is seen as a thoughtful jurist who comes to the right conclusion. He is praised for his temperament as well as his courtroom management skills. He keeps the call moving but gives the litigants ample time to make their case. Judge Agran is reported to be fair and is expecially praised for his handling of pro se litigants. The Council finds him Well Qualified for retention to the Circuit Court.

Judge Thomas R. Allen was admitted to the Illinios bar in 1977. He was appointed to the bench by the Illinois Supreme Court in 2011. From 1990 to 2010, he was a partner with Chapekis Marcus Allen & Chapekis. From 1986 to 1990, he was a sole practitioner doing criminal defense, real estate, and litigation. From 1987 to1992 he was a Panel Attorney for the Federal Defender Program and from 1976 to1986, he served as an Assistant Cook County Public Defender. He served as a Chicago Alderman from 1993 to 2010. He was elected to the bench in 2012.

Since 2012, has has been assigned to Calendar 10 of the Chancery Division of the Circuit Court of Cook County in Chicago, Illinois. His call consists of all causes of action sounding in equity including, but not limited to, injunctions, condominium disputes, declaratory judgments, temporary restraining orders, complaints in administrative review, shareholder derivatie disputes, and claims of breach of fiduciary duty. He also serves, by appointment, on two Supreme Court Committees: the Legislative Committee of the Supreme Court (Member, 2011present) and the Alternative Dispute Resolution Coordinating Committee (Chair, 2015-present). His previous judicial assignments were in the Probate Division (2011-2012) and Traffic Court (2010-2011)

4

Judge Allen is considered to have good courtroom management skills and to have a very good temperament. He is respectful to both litigants and lawyers. He is described as "practical" in his approach to ruling, and respondents generally find him to be a good judge. The Council finds him Qualified for retention to the Circuit Court..

Judge Larry G. Axelrood was admitted to the Illinois bar in 1985. He became an Associate Judge in 2005. From 1989 to 2005 Judge Axelrood worked as a sole practitioner specializing in criminal defense. From 1985 to 1989, he served as an Assistant Cook County State's Attorney. He was elected to the bench in 2012.

Since February 2017, he has been assigned to a jury room in the Law Division of the Circuit Court of Cook County in Chicago, Ilinois, where he is responsible for hearing jury trials and pretrial settlement conferences. His previous judicial assignments were in the Law Division, Motion section, Courtroom 2208 (2014-2017); in the Second District and Criminal Division in Skokie, Illinois (2004-2007), the Third District in Rolling Meadows, Illinois (2005-2007), and the First District (2005). In 2012, the Chicago Council of Lawyers rated him as well-qualified.

Judge Axelrood is praised for his knowledge of the law and for being a hard-working jurist who is exceptionally respectful of both litigants and lawyers. He is also well regarded for his ability and willingness to deal with pro se litigants ? being fair without providing the legal assistance that a judge cannot provide. He is reported to be well-prepared. He is praised for being fair in his rulings. The Council finds him Well Qualified for retention to the Circuit Court.

Judge Ronald F. Bartkowicz was admitted to the Illinois bar in 1965. Prior to becoming a judge, Ronald Bartkowicz was an attorney for the Chicago Transit Authority for 20 years. Judge Bartkowicz was appointed in 1985 as an Associate Judge and appointed as a Circuit Court judge in 1997. He was elected to the Circuit Court in 2000. Since September 2017, he has been assigned to the General Calendar J of the Law Division of the Circuit Court of Cook County in Chicago, Ilinois. His prevous judicial assignments were in the Trial Section, Law Division, Courtroom 2609 (2014-2017), Commercial Calendar Y, Courtroom 2101 (2001-2014), Trial Section, Law Division, Courtrom 2101 (1998-2001), and First Municipal District, various assignments (1985-1998).

Respondents indicated that Judge Bartkowicz has excellent courtroom management skills. His courtroom was consistently described as a "level playing field" with few exceptions. He is described as "effective" in his use of pretrial time. He is considered hard-working and very diligent, with more than one respondent commenting on his long hours in a typical day. Judge Bartkowicz is knowledgeable about substantive and procedural law on his cases. Overall, Judge Bartkowicz is well-respected as a diligent and capable judge. The Council finds him Qualified for retention to the Circuit Court.

Judge Carl B. Boyd was admitted to the Illinois bar in 1991. Prior to taking the bench, he was in private practice. He was elected to the bench in 2012. Since March 2017, he has been assigned to the Felony Division, Room 108, Sixth Muncipal District of the Circuit Court of Cook County in Markham, Illinois. He presides over all assigned felony matters from arraignments

5

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download